Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 10,901, John Douglass, Mass.

SERVICE
NUMBER
Douglass, John
No. 10,901
or John Spencer
Pitcher, Mehitable
(Former Widow)
CONTENTS

Increase no. 6.452 Connecticut, (Hartford) Nehitable Fitcher (Formerly) widow of John Douglass who served in the Revolutionary Mass war, as a Corporal.
Inscribed on the Roll at the rate of 188 Dollars 00
Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1848. (Red payt. made since) 30th " 7 September 1865
Certificate of Pension issued the 8th day of March 1869 and sent to
J. W. Johnson Windsor Locks Conn And Joint Res Feb 1869
Recorded on Roll of Pensioners under act February 2, 1848, Page 185 Vol. H No 1
J. N. Smith Sent

State of Connecticut, County of Hartford, and } 55. District of Suffield
On this seventh day of March A. D. 1854, personally appeared in open Court, before the Court of Probate in and for the said District of Suffield, Mehitable Pitcher, at present a resident of said Suffield, aged many eighty-four years, who, being first duly sworn according to law, doth on her oath and from the best of her knowledge and belief make the following Declaration in order to obtain the benefit of the provision made by the acts of Congress passed July 7 th , 1838, and August 23 rd 1842, and the acts supplemental and additional thereto - granting pensions to widows of persons who served during the Revolutionary War.
That she was formerly the widow of John Douglas of Revolutionary memory, who, after the close of the War and before her marriage to him took the name of John Spencer Douglas, and who was a private in the Company of Capt John Danforth's Company of Col. David Brewer's Regt. of Infantry at the siege of Boston, in 1775.
That her said husband was a resident of Palmer in the State of Massachusetts during all his Revolutionary Service : that he enlisted at said Palmer for the term of eight months, and faithfully served at the term of his enlistment around said Boston until the term expired, when he was honorably discharged and returned home.
She further declares that her said husband again enlisted at said Palmer for the term of three years, as a private, about the commencement of the year 1777 - in the Company of Capt — Allen of the 13 th Regiment of the Continental Army, Massachusetts Line, commanded by Col. Smith, and served the largest portion of the term of his enlistment as a private, but the latter part of it as some kind of an Officer - either Sergeant or Corporal - at various

-posts and places with the Continental Army, until the term of his enlistment expired, when he was honorably discharged again and returned home to Palmer aforesaid.
She further Declares that her said husband again enlisted into the Massachusetts Continental Line of the Army, at said Palmer, in the Spring of 1781, for either the term of three years or during the War - as a private or Sergeant - she is not certain which; and she is unable to state the particulars of the names of the Officers under whom he served during this his last term, - but Declares that he continued so to serve with the Army in said Continental Line until after the peace, when he was again honorably discharged and returned home to said Palmer. She further Declares that she knows of no witness living who can testify from his own personal knowledge of the facts and particulars of said service; and she therefore begs to refer to the records of the War Department, Washington, in proof of the same, being confident that those records will show the service and the fact that her said husband hailed from Palmer, - and there is abundant proof that no person of the name of John Douglas served from said Palmer other than her said husband.
She further Declares that she has for many years believed that she was entitled to a pension for her said husband's services, from her recollection of having often heard her said husband state in his lifetime that he served altogether seven years in the War of the Revolution , - but that not knowing of any of his fellow soldiers living who served with him and whose testimony she could procure to prove the service, - this consideration and other causes beyond her control have hitherto prevented the presentation of her claim.
She further Declares that she was married to the said John Spencer Douglas (formerly John Douglas) at -

— Norwich, in the State of Massachusetts, by Rev. Stephen Tracy, on the fifteenth day of December, in the year seventeen hundred and eighty-seven: that her said husband, John Douglas, alias John Spencer Douglas, was killed by the fall of a tree upon him, in the State of Ohio — while clearing land for the purpose of removing his family upon it — on or about the twentieth of September in the year eighteen hundred: that she was not married to him prior to his leaving the service, but the marriage took place previous to the first day of January, seventeen hundred and ninety-four, viz: at the time above stated.
She further declares that after the death of her husband aforesaid she was married to Jonathan Pitcher on the thirtieth day of May A.D. 1802 and that he died on the eleventh day of February in the year eighteen hundred and forty seven and that she did not again marry after his decease, and that she is now a widow.
Witnessed by Walter R Gregory Nathan A. Gale.
Mehitable she X Pitcher mark
Sworn to and subscribed the day and year first above written
Before me George W. Weston Judge of said Court.
I, James L. Loomis, Clerk of the Court of Sessions, for the District of Rappahannock & State of Virginia do hereby certify that George William E. [unclear] signature appears above, as the Judge of said Court in the District of Rappahannock, is that his signature as it appears above is his true & genuine signature.
My hand and seal of said Court this seventh day of March, 1854 (I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the original as shown by my direction.)
James L. Loomis Clerk

I, Silas Hubbell, of Southamptown in the County of Hampshire and State of Massachusetts, do on my oath testify and declare that I am in the eighty second year of my age; that I was well acquainted with John Douglas, the identical person, who married Mehitable Weller — who, since his decease married Jonathan Pitcher; and I do well know that said John Douglas was reputed to have performed much service in the War of the Revolution and in the army thereof while a resident of Palmer.
And I do further testify and declare that it was only after his Revolutionary Service that he assumed the name of John Spencer Douglas; that I have often heard him tell of his services in the army of the Revolution and of his receiving a wound while in the service; and I do well know that Mehitable Pitcher, who is understood to have signed the annexed Declaration was formerly the widow of said John Douglas and is now the widow of said Jonathan Pitcher and has not intermarried since his decease. Also that said Pitcher died on or about the Eleventh day of July —
A.D. 1847 — Witnessed by
Alpheus Strong
R. G. Pormay
Commonwealth of Mass
County of Hampshire 5 55 April 3 rd 1854.
Then the above named Silas Hubbell, a credible witness, personally appeared and made oath in due form of law to the truth of the above affidavit by him subscribed —
Before me,
Rufus G. Pormay
Justice of the Peace.

State of Massachusetts } County of Hampshire }
I Elias Hubbell of the Town of South Hadley in the County & State aforesaid, do further testify upon my oath, that I was well acquainted with John Douglass alias John Spencer Douglass, at the time of his marriage to Mehitable Weller within named, (who now applies for Pension as Mehitable Pitcher) and that I do well know that said marriage took place about the year 1787, and that it did certainly take place before the year 1794 , and I further certify that, during all my acquaintance with John Douglass aforesaid, after the War of the Revolution, he was lame from the effect (as he himself informed me) of a wound received in battle, in said War.
Witnessed by Myheer Strong K B P
Elias Hubbell
Subscribed & sworn to this Third day of April A.D. 1834. before me,
Rufus L. Pomeroy Justice of the Peace
And I certify that Elias Hubbell above named is personally well known to me, & entitled to full credit,
Rufus L. Pomeroy, Justice of the Peace.

State of Massachusetts County of Hampshire Town of Norwich,
Sally Douglass daughter of John S Douglass & Mahitable was born Oct 12 th 1788 = John Douglass son of John & Mahitable Douglass was born Nov 30 th 1790 James Douglass son of John & Mahitable Douglass was born Jan'y 17 th 1793 Emula Douglass daughter of John & Mahitable Douglass was born Nov 28 th 1796 Charles Douglass son of John & Mahitable Douglass was born Apr 9 th 1799
I certify that the above is a true copy of the record of Births for the Town of Norwich, and that the dates when written out in full appear as follows viz: Sally Douglass was born twelfth day of October Seventeen hundred Eighty Eight John Douglass was born thirtieth day of November Seventeen hundred Ninety James Douglass was born seventeenth day of January Seventeen hundred Ninety Three Emula Douglass was born November twenty eighth day Seventeen hundred Ninety Six Charles Douglass was born ninth day of April Seventeen hundred Ninety Nine Syman Dimeock Town Clerk
State of Massachusetts County of Hampshire Town of Norwich Johnathan Pitcher and Mrs. Mahitable Douglass both of Norwich were joined in the Marriage covenant by Rev R Woodbridge May 30 th 1802 Johnathan Pitcher Died Feb 11 th 1847 Age 94 years 9 months
I further certify that the above are true extracts from the record of marriages & deaths in this Town, & that the date of the death when written out in full ap- pears as follows, viz: Johnathan Pitcher died the Eleventh day of February Eighteen hundred and forty seven Syman Dimeock Town Clerk
I Syman Dimeock, above named, depose and say that I hold the Office of Town Clerk, in the Town County & State aforesaid, and that the above are true copies from the records of said Town as certified by me, Syman Dimeock, Clerk of said Town Norwich March 21 st 1854
Subscribed

Subscribed, and duly sworn to, before me, this Twenty first day of March A.D. 1834, and I certify that I am personally acquainted with said, Symon Dinnock that he holds the office of Clerk in said Town of Norwich, and is a person of truth & veracity. Rufus L. D. Posneroy, Justice of the Peace.
I Joseph Hampshire Shanton of Norwich in the County of and State of Massachusetts, on oath declare that I am in the sixty fourth year of my age that I am well acquainted with Mehitable Pitcher who now applies for a Pension as the widow (formerly) of John Douglass alias John Spencer Douglass, That I do well know that between the years 1788 & 1794 said Mehitable Pitcher, and John Douglass alias John Spencer Douglass, lived together as husband and wife; and so continued to live until the death of said John Douglass in or about the year 1800, by the fall of a tree in Ohio That I do well know that the records of Murray & North contained in the foregoing certificates of the Town Clerk of Norwich, are records of the births of children of the aforesaid Mehitable Pitcher & John Douglass alias John Spencer Douglass Witnessed by John Brown Joseph Shanton E. W. Posneroy Subscribed & sworn to, before me, this Twenty second day of March - A.D. 1834, and I certify that said Joseph Shanton is a reliable witness & every way cred- ible. Rufus L. D. Posneroy, Justice of the Peace

State of Massachusetts County of Hampshire                      Town of Norwich
John Douglas and Mahitable Miller were joined in Marriage Covenant December 15 th 1787 Samuel Knight Town Clerk
I certify that the above is a true copy of the record of Marriage for the town of Norwich As then written out in full appears as follows viz John Douglas and Mahitable Miller were joined in the Marriage Covenant December fifteenth day, seventeen hundred, eighty seven Symon Dimock Town Clerk
I Symon Dimock above named depose and say that I hold the office of Town Clerk in the town County & State aforesaid and that the above are true copies from the records of said Town - Norwich March 21 st 1854
Symon Dimock Clerk of said Town
Subscribed and duly sworn to before me this twenty first day of March A D 1854 and I certify that I am personally acquainted with said Symon Dimock that he holds the Office of Clerk in said town of Norwich & is a person of truth & veracity Rubus S. F. Pomeroy Justice of the Peace

Notable Sketch John S. Douglass
Nov 38
FREE
Hon. Loren D. Waldo, Commissioner of Pensions, Washington , D.C.

FREE
Substitute Etcher for original
Dear Loren P. Waldo, Commissioner of Pensions, Washington, D. C.

Jonathan Pitcher
No papers in file
Meritable Pitcher for wd of J. S. Douglas Con dus 38
she is also the wd of
Jonathan Pitcher
J. S. Douglas Daughter of Jonathan Pitcher
RECEIVED

Enquiring after the case of Mrs Mehitable Pitcher Count '38 Suspended
Hon George L Whiting Committee of Reunions Comm. Examiner No

15,180
Mehitable Pitcher Wid of John Spencer Doug- las, Cont
La. Gregory June 13 1854-
Abain Aug 21 1854-
Gregory Oct 18 1854-
J. J. Coombs July 5 1855-
Vice Interim June 10/56
Dec affirmed See letter C
J. J. Coombs June 18 1857
Same Nov 26. 1858

Windsor Locks, Conn.
Feb. 8. 1869
Hon. Chit. C. Cox,
Sir:
Enclosed please find the Application of Mehitable Pitcher for an Increase of her pension.
If there are any imperfections in the formalities of the application will you inform me immediately that they may be corrected without delay. And if possible will you return the new Certificate in season for her to draw her pension in March as the old lady is very much in need of the money, being poor, and of course unable to help herself, though bright & smart, and being supported by her Grandchildren who are also poor. Yours respectfully
J. W. Johnson.

764 Connecticut
Mehitable Fletcher, formerly
widow of John Douglass,
who was a corporal,
in the Revolution,
Inscribed on the Roll at the rate of 88 Dollars 00 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1843. 11th " " February 1847
Certificate of Pension issued the 1 st day of April 1839 and sent to
J. J. Crambs Present.
[Acts of March 3, 1843, and June 17, 1844.]
Recorded in Book 11 Vol. 1 Page 176.

6.454
Connecticut
Mehitable Pitcher, formerly widow of John Douglass.
who served in the Revolutionary
war, as a corporal.
Inscribed on the Roll at the rate of 88 Dollars 00,
Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1848.
Certificate of Pension issued the 1 st day of April 1859. and sent to
J. J. Coombs Present,
Recorded on Roll of Pensioners under act February 2, 1848, Page 185, Vol. H.

Department of the Interior, Official Business.
6000 676
Dear Geo. L. Whitney, Committee of Resignations
Memorandum of Court '38 Supp.
addressee, Memorandum of her or with 38 John Douglas Nov. 1888

Mehitable Pitcher for wid of Ino. S. Douglass 1st husband of 2nd husband Jonathan
Con - Aug 1820
DEPARTMENT OF THE
Pension Office, Official Business
J. Calhoun Acting Commi
J. David Esq.
Phoenicia
N. Y.

Rev WIDOW, &c. over
File No. _____
18401
Mchitable Pitcher
Wid
John Douglas
Pre Rev War
Act: _____
Feb 2 nd 1848
Index:—Vol. _____
M
Page _____
130
[Arrangement of 1870.]

Meritable Pitcher March 38 Sup 5
additional evidence
6
SA Markland for Goflogny Ally

State of Massachusetts , County of Hampshire , } ss
On this Twelfth day of November , A.D. 1838, before me the subscriber, a Justice of the Peace within and for the said County of Hampshire personally appeared Mehitable Pitcher, now a resident of Southampton in said County, who, being first duly sworn according to law, doth on her oath testify and declare that she is aged eighty-eight years, and that she is the identical Mehitable Pitcher who made her legal Declaration on the seventh day of March, A.D. 1834, with the view of obtaining the benefit of the provisions of the Revolutionary Pension Act of Congress, approved July 7th, 1838, and the acts supplementary and additional thereto - by and through the Revolutionary services of her first husband, John Douglass, alias John Spencer Douglass, - all the allegations and statements of which Declaration she does hereby fully renew & reaffirm.
She farther declares that her said husband was never known by any other name than that of John Douglass at the time she was married to him - as will appear by her sworn Marriage Certificate, and that she is now unable to recall any other reason for his having adopted "Spencer" for a middle name, soon after she was married to him, than the respect which he always entertained for his Grandmother Spencer.
Witnessed by The alphabetical & numerical reference
Sethus Edwards Henry Wilkewell R. S. P. Pomeroy
Mehitable her X Pitcher mark
Sworn to and subscribed before me by said Mehitable Pitcher on the day and year first above written - Rufus L. P. Pomeroy Justice of the Peace.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary's Office, Boston, Nov. 16 th 1858.
I Hereby Certify, That at the date of the attestation hereto annexed
Rufus L. T. Pomeroy was a
Justice of the Peace for the County of Hampshire
in the said Commonwealth, duly commissioned and constituted: and that to his acts and attestations, as such, full faith and credit are and ought to be given, in and out of Court.
In Testimony of which, I have hereunto affixed the SEAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH, the date above written.
Oliver Warner.
Secretary of the Commonwealth.

I, Me Gates, of Palmer, in the County of Hampden and State of Massachusetts, do on my oath testify and declare that I am in the ninety-second year of my age: that I was born in Stowe in the County of Middlesex and state aforesaid, but removed to said Palmer in March of the year seventeen hundred and eighty-one and have resided here ever since, excepting about six years in Brooklyn and Mason in the State of New Hampshire - since I have been a Revolutionary Pensioner: that I performed service in the Army of the Revolution while I resided at Stowe aforesaid, for which I was pensioned on the 15th. of August, A.D. 1833, at the rate of Forty-five Dollars and 33 cents per annum, under the law of June 7th, 1832.
And I do on my oath as aforesaid further testify and declare that I well knew John Douglass at the time I came to reside in said Palmer, and the fact was notorious that he the said Douglass performed several years service in the War of the Revolution; and I recollect that he entered the Army near about the time I removed to Palmer for "the last three years service," but I am unable to state whether he served out the term of his enlistment, though I never heard to the contrary, and well recollect that he was related to or connected with the Smith Family in the North part of Palmer, in which part I have always resided.
Said Douglass went away from Palmer shortly after the War, but I have no personal knowledge of where he afterwards lived. I am confident that no other person of the name of John

Douglass ever lived in Palmer  aforsaid but the person I have described  and  while I have resided in said town , and I have no knowledge of any other person of that name having resided there during said War, excepting the person I have described ; and although I have no certain personal knowledge of it, yet I have no doubt that he the before described Douglass was the identical person who was formerly the husband of Mehitable Pitcher , who, it is understood, has applied for a pension for his Revolutionary Services.
Witnessed by
Micah his  X  Gates mark
John of  Palmer Joseph Cummings
Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
County of Hampshire } ss.
September 6th, 1854,
Then personally came and appeared before me, the subscriber, the above named Micah Gates, and made oath in due form of law to the truth of the above affidavit by him subscribed. And I certify that said affiant is a credible witness to me personally well known.
Attest,
Joseph Cummings , Justice of the Peace.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary's Office, Boston, September 16 th 1854.
I hereby Certify, That at the date of the annexed attestation Joseph Cummings was a Justice of the Peace for the County of Hampshire.
in the said Commonwealth, duly commissioned and constituted; and that to his acts and attestations, as such, full faith and credit are and ought to be given, in and out of Court.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto affixed the Seal of the Commonwealth, the date above written.
E. M. Sleeper Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Mehitable Pitcher formerly widow of John Douglass Conn. - Hartford Co Act July 7, 1838 &c
Married Dec: 15, 1787. Douglass died Sept 20, 1800 Married Pitcher 30th May 1800 He died Feb 11th, 1847.
Admitted
36 Mos Col. Capt Allen Col Smith - Mafu Line at $ 88. per annum to Commence February 11th 1847, when her second husband died - ,
Atty J. J. Coombs Present

Adopting the views contained in Judge Waldo's letter to J. J. Coombs of July 5, 1855, which was adopted as the basis of the Secretary's decision on the appeal. There were two points upon which the evidence was not satisfactory - namely, the difference in the name and the want of conclusive evidence to trace Douglas from Palmer to Norwich.
The affidavit in paper number 5, which is additional evidence taken together with the affidavit of Meicah Gates, (N o 2) shows as conclusively enough that no family of Douglas lived in the town of Palmer either before, during, or subsequent to the war. Gates swears that Douglas was connected with the Smith family, thus lending confirmation to the statement of James Gregory, (N o 2). The probability that the claimant's husband was from Palmer was rendered very strong from the sworn statements of the claimant and of Silas Hubbell, and Joseph Stanton. This probability is also favored strongly by the fact that there were two persons named John Douglas in the regiment of Col. Calvin Smith. There must have been some reason why the claimant selected the John Douglas who was from Palmer. I do not agree with Mr Coombs that the claimant was in total ignorance of what the records at Boston would show when she made the written application for the certificate which is on file. Still I think she had before indicated

the residence of her late husband and that he served seven years in the revolution. In short I think that taking her affidavit in paper N o 6. and that of Walter R. Gregory, in paper N o  4 5, which last I regard as highly important - that the claimant has shown satisfactorily that her husband was the John Douglas who served from Palmer, and has accounted in a natural and satisfactory manner for her husband's change of name. The fact that the name is John Douglas in the entry of the marriage, John S. in the entry of the birth of the first child and John afterwards, shows very clearly that while he sometimes used the middle initial S. he was known as John Douglas. The claimant's frankness in giving the middle name (if she knew that the rolls did not show it) is an indication of honesty that should weigh in her favor.
Paper N o 4. tho' not legal evidence, is entitled to consideration, confirmed as it is by N o 5.
I think Judge Waldo himself would change his decision with the additional proof before him.
S. G. Dr

State of Connecticut } County of Hartford } ss -
On this 6 th day of February A. D. one thousand eight hundred and sixty nine, personally appeared before me Judge of the Probate Court for the District of Suffield Conn. Mehitable Pitcher aged one hundred years, a resident of Suffield, in the State of Connecticut, who, being duly sworn according to law, declares that she is the identical Mehitable Pitcher to whom was granted Pension Certificate No. — payable at Hartford Conn. at the rate of eighty eight dollars per annum, issued under the act of February 2 d 1848; that she makes this declaration in order to secure the increase of her pension to which she is entitled under the thirteenth section of the act of July 27 th 1868; and she further swears that she has not remarried since the date of her last pension certificate, and that she hereby constitutes and appoints J. Warren Johnson, of Windsor Locks, Conn. her true and lawful Atty. to prosecute this claim in her behalf. My Post Office Address is
Witnessed by:
Suffield Conn.
Charles Brewster Mehitable  her Pitcher Albert M c Master mark
J. W. Johnson

Also personally appeared Albert M c Master and Charles Brewster residents of said Suffield, persons whom I certify to be respectable and entitled to credit, and who, being by me duly sworn, say that they were present and saw Whitcomb Pitcher  her make her mark to the foregoing declaration; and they further swear that they have every reason to believe, from the appearance of the applicant and their acquaintance with her that she is the identical person she represents herself to be, and that she has not remarried since the date of her lost pension certificate, and that they have no interest in the prosecution of this claim.
Albert M c Master Charles Brewster
Sworn and subscribed before me this 6 th day of February A.D. 1869; and I hereby certify that I have no interest, direct or indi- rect in the prosecution of this claim.
David Hale Judge of the Probate Court for the District of Suffield.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary's Office, Boston, Aug. 7 1858.
I Hereby Certify , That at the date of the attestations hereto annexed A. L. Murdock & James G. Allin were Justice of the Peace for the County of Hampden
in the said Commonwealth, duly commissioned and constituted: and that to their acts and attestations, as such, full faith and credit are and ought to be given, in and out of Court.
Testimony of which, I have hereunto affixed the SEAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH, the date above written.
Deputy  Andrew M. Smith Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Mehitable Pitcher formerly widow of John Douglas
Additional Evidence
5
Please add up James Gregory & son Marblehead Mass. case of J. J. Conway Hunt

State of Massachusetts, County of Hampden
I Timothy Ferrell of Palmer in the County of Hampden, on my oath declare that I am seventy six years of age, that I have always resided in Palmer aforesaid; that I have been well acquainted with all the families who have resided for any length of time in Palmer, during the past 60 years. That during that time no person, or family by the name of Douglass, have resided in said Palmer.
Timothy Ferrell
State of Mass. County of Hampden
Subscribed and duly sworn to before me this ninth day of March, A.D. 1854 and I certify that I am personally acquaint- ed with said Timothy Ferrell, and know him to be every way credible.
A. R. Murdock, Justice of the Peace
I further certify that I hold the Office of Assessor in the aforesaid Town of Palmer, that I have this day overlooked the old lists of legal voters for said Town, as far back as 1890 (to which date we have quite full records), without finding the name of Douglass among them; and that prior to that date we have no records of consequence, of said legal voters
A. R. Murdock, Justice of the Peace

State of Massachusetts, County of Hampden, ss. I, Ebenezer Brown, of Palmer, in the County and state aforesaid, do solemnly swear, that I hold the Office of Town Clerk for the said Town of Palmer; that I have this day examined the list of all the original Proprietors of the Town of Palmer aforesaid, and also a list of heads of families and married persons among whom seats were distributed in the meeting House of Palmer in 1766, (and which latter list, is understood to include every head of a family then living in said Palmer) — both of which lists are contained upon the Old Records of said Palmer, — and that the name of Douglass is not borne upon either of said records of Proprietors & Pew Holders And I further declare that I have no doubt, from the records above referred to — from the records of later date with which I am fa- miliar, & from the opinion of old resi- dents of said Palmer, now living, that John Douglass alias John Spencer Douglass whose widow Mehitable Pitcher now applies for a Pension for his services in the War of the Revolution, was the identical person who served from Palmer aforesaid under the name of John Douglass, and that he was the only person of that name who ever lived in the Town of Palmer aforesaid, Ebenezer Brown Town Clerk Palmer
Subscribed and sworn to this tenth day of March A.D. 1834 before me, and I certify that I am personally acquainted with said Ebenezer Brown, that he holds the Office of Clerk in Palmer aforesaid, & that his credibility is perfect, James G. Allen, Justice of the Peace

2, Walter R. Gregory, of Marblehead in the County of Essex, gentleman, do on my oath testify and declare that in the course of investigations which I was called upon to make into the Revolutionary Pension Claim of Abigail Pitchen, formerly the widow of John Douglass, alias John Spencer Douglass - under the Act of July 7 th 1818, and the acts additional thereto - I learned from the widow herself that her said former husband was born in Albany, N. York, and that his mother - who belonged to Palmer, Massachusetts, and was related to the Smith Family of that town, died in some days after her birth.
Also that her said former husband was carried to said Palmer soon after his birth and was reared or brought up there under the care and nurture of the said Smith Family and of his Grandmother Spencer ; and further, that she could recall no other reason than that of his veneration for her said Grandmother as the cause of his having adopted Spencer as his middle name - soon after she was married to him.
Witnessed by, J. V. Verray
Walter R. Gregory.
State of Massachusetts, County of Essex ss. August 7 th 1818.
Then personally appeared Walter R. Gregory, and made oath in due form of law to the truth of the above affidavit by him subscribed. And I certify that said affidavit is a credible report to me personally well known. Attest, John Sparhawk Justice of the Peace.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary's Office, Boston, Aug. 7 1858.
I Hereby Certify , That at the date of the attestation hereto annexed
John Sparhawk Jr Justice of the Peace for the County of Essex
in the said Commonwealth, duly commissioned and constituted: and that to his acts and attestations, as such, full faith and credit are and ought to be given, in and out of Court.
In Testimony of which, I have hereunto affixed the SEAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH, the date above written.
J. G. [Signature] Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Mehitable Pitcher formerly widow of John Douglas.
Mar. Act 1838.
See
J. H. Gault

Be know all men by these presents that I, James Gregory, of Marblehead in the County of Essex and State of Massachusetts, Notary Public and Justice of the Peace in and for the said County, being hereto duly authorized, as the Attorney and Agent of Michilable Pitcher, former the widow of John Douglas - with power of substitution, - do hereby authorize and empower D. D. Coombes Esq., Attorney at Law and Agent for Claimes, of Washington, District of Columbia, to take charge of and prosecute the claim of said Michilable Pitcher to a Revolutionary Pension under the provisions of the law of July 7th, 1838, and the Acts additional thereto, as the widow of John Douglas, alias John S. Douglas, and to do act and transact any and all business in the premises necessary to the full adjudication of said claim.
Dated at said Marblehead, this 16th day of June A. D. 1855.
James Gregory,

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary's Office, Boston, May 23 1854
I Hereby Certify , That at the date of the annexed attestation Rufus L. S. Pomeroy was a Justice of the Peace for the County of Hampshire.
in the said Commonwealth, duly commissioned and constituted; and that to his acts and attestations, as such, full faith and credit are and ought to be given, in and out of Court.
In Testimony whereof, I have hereunto affixed the Seal of the Commonwealth, the date above written.
E. H. Wright
Secretary of the Commonwealth.

I Joseph Stanton of Norwich in the County of Hampshire and State of Massachusetts, do on my oath declare that I am in the twenty first year of my age, that I was well acquainted with John Douglass alias John Spencer Douglass. (whose widow, Mehitable Pitcher, now applies for a Pension from the United States) during all his residence in Norwich, Hampshire County Mass. that he settled in Norwich aforesaid, soon after the close of the Revolutionary War and continued to live in said Norwich till about the year 1800, when he left for Ohio & is understood to have been killed there by the fall of a Tree, while clearing land. That I do well know, from conversations with himself & his friends during his residence in Norwich aforesaid, that he resided in the Town of Palmer, Hampden County, Mass. during the War of the Revolution. Said Douglass I well remember was about six feet in height, and appeared to be about forty years of age when he left Norwich about the year 1800.
Witnessed by John F. Brown E. A. D. Dameroy State of Massachusetts } ss. County of Hampshire }
Joseph Stanton
Then personally appeared the above named Joseph Stanton, a credible witness and to me well known, and made oath in due form of law to the truth of the above declaration by him subscribed, before me, this Twenty Fifth day of March A.D. 1834
Rufus L. Dameroy, Justice of the Peace

15,180. Nehitable Pitcher former widow of John Douglas alias John Spencer Doug- las. Cook
July, 7 1838

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary's Office, Boston:
April 27 th 1854.
I hereby Certify, That, from an examination of the Books and Documents relating to Military Services in the War of the Revolution, which remain in this Department, it appears that The name of John Douglass is borne on Return of Capt. Jonathan Danforth's Comp. Col. David Brewer's Regt. of 8 mos. Men, name on Coat roll dated Roxbury Camp. Nov. 14. 1775. from Palmer.
Also on Continental Army Books in Capt. Noah Allen's Company Col. Calvin Smith's Regt. from January 1. 1777 to Dec. 31. 1779. 36 mos. as Corporal, from Palmer.
Also on return of the Men mustered for 3 months for the First Regt. in the County of Hampshire of which John Bliss is Col. Mustered July 13. 1780, from Palmer.
Also on discipline list of 3 years Men, Age 21. Complex. Light. Stature, 6 feet. Occup. Farmer. from Palmer. Hampshire County. Enqued. April 11. 1781. for Three years.
Also the following receipt, viz. Over

"Palmer April 17. 1781." "We the Subscribers, do jointly and severally acknowledge That we have each of us received of the Selectmen of Palmer, Ninety Pounds, in hand money, as a lion for our engaging in the Continental Service for the term of three years for said Town, agreeable to orders from the General Court of this State bearing date (December the Second One Thousand Seven Hundred and Eighty as witness our hands." and
And I further Certify, That, before search made for evidence (Please see opposite leaf) of said facts, the application hereto annexed was filed in this Office, in the form in which the same now appears: that the search was made by myself and my clerks alone; and that said application, and the certificate above set forth, contain all the facts and circumstances within my knowledge, pertaining to the case.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto affixed the Seal of the Commonwealth, the date above written.
E. B. Dyer Secretary of the Commonwealth.

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF REVOLUTIONARY SERVICES, made by the widow of the party who rendered the service.
State of Connecticut , county of Hartford and town of Suffield .
The Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is hereby requested to furnish evidence from the Rolls in his office, of the service of my late  former husband, John Douglas, afterwards John Spencer Douglas } in the war of the Revolution.
He was a resident  native of the town of Palmer in the county of Hampden and State of Massachusetts . During all his Revolutionary Service —
He enlisted from the town of Palmer in the county of Hampden and State of Massachusetts in the year 1775, as a private , in the Company commanded by Captain John Lanforth , in the _____ Regiment of Col. De Brewer and he served as follows, * viz: —
at the siege of Boston for the full term of eight months and until the term of his enlistment expired.
My said former husband afterwards enlisted into the Army again about the commencement of the year 1777, for the term of three years, as a private , and served part of the time in that capacity and part of the time as a non-commissioned Officer , in the Company of a Capt. Allen of the 13th. Regiment of the Continental Army, Massachusetts Line, commanded by Col. Smith, and he faithfully served out the term —
* Here describe, as fully as may be, the length of service, the rank, &c. of the claimant, or the capacity in which he served, and all other particulars known.

-of his enlistment at various posts and places with the Army until he was honorably discharged.
After the expiration of his last term of enlistment my said husband again entered the service of the Massachusetts Continental Line of the Army, for either three years or during the War, and served as a Sergeant on Colford, she believes, but is uncertain which; and she is unable to give the particulars of this period of her said husband's service, or the names of the officers under whom it was performed, but she is confident that he continued in the service until the establishment of peace between the two countries, when he was again honorably discharged and returned to his home in said Palmer, - having served at various times in the war full seven years altogether, during all which time his domicile and legal place of residence was in his said  native town of Palmer.
I am now 84 years old, and my memory does not enable me to state the services of my said former husband more fully than above stated.
WITNESS my hand, this seventh day of March A. D. 1864
Subscribed Signed by said Mehitable Pitcher in my presence, before me
Calvin W. Phillips
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE.
for Hartford County
Mehitable Pitcher

REGULATIONS, to be observed in the examination of the Revolutionary service, have been rendered necessary under the rules which are established Department at Washington, viz :
1. The application requiring search, or certificate, must be made to the Secretary, in writing, by the claimant, or by some person duly authorized by the claimant ; and the signature to the application must be attested by some magistrate.
2. The application must set forth, as fully as the circumstances of the case will allow, the residence and service of the soldier, and the names of the officers under whom he served ; and no search will be made until after the filing of such written application.
“Regulations to be observed in the examination of the Massachusetts Revolutionary Papers in the office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.”
“The application must be made to the Secretary in writing, by the claimant, or by some person duly authorized by the claimant, by a written power of attorney, attested by a magistrate. The signature of the claimant must in all cases be attested in like manner.
“The application must set forth, as fully as the circumstances of the case will allow, the residence of the soldier, &c., at the time of the service, and the names of the various officers under whom he served, as well as the nature of such service.
“The certificate of the Secretary must show that the search was made, after the filing of such application, by himself, or by one of his Clerks alone, and must be accompanied by the original application of the claimant, or of his attorney, and by a detailed state- ment, under the signature of the Secretary, and the seal of the State, of the circumstances which satisfied that officer of the identity of the party described in the application, with the individual who rendered the service.
J. L. EDWARDS, COMMISSIONER OF PENSIONS.”

Signed by John Douglass and six others.

Washington, June 26 th 1855.
Sir:
I have received a letter from James Gregory Esq. of Marblehead, Massachusetts, requesting my assistance in the prosecution of the claim of Maheta-ble Peter, formerly widow of John Douglas, (alias John Spencer Douglas), dec d under act of 1838.
Having carefully examined the papers in said case, I am so strongly impressed with the conviction that new weight has not been given to the evidence on former examinations, that I feel it my duty to solicit your personal examination of the claim.
The enclosed letter from Mr. Gregory was designed for my perusal only, but on reflection I have determined to

submit it to you, as I think it contains a candid statement of the history of the case.
Mr. Gregory has so fully argued the case in this letter, and in his letter on file of Oct. 13 th 1884, as to leave little for me to add. I will, however, remark, that it appears to me that the first husband of the claimant is identified with the John Douglas on the Massachusetts rolls, by evidence of a remarkably clear and conclusive character. I will briefly recapitulate.
1 st She proves by record evidence that she was married to John Douglas on the 15 th Dec. 1787.
2 d She proves by two old men, who knew her and her husband from a time anterior to her marriage, that her husband John Douglas moved from Palmer Mass. after their marriage, and was reputed

to have served in the revolutionary war from the Town of Palmer.
3 2 She proves by Michl Gates, himself a revolutionary pensioner, that he re- moved to Palmer 1781, and became acquainted with a John Douglas, who was then in the service, and he is confident that said John Douglas was the only man of that name who ever lived in the Town of Palmer. He does not know, of his own knowledge, that this John Douglas is the same man who afterwards married the Claim- ant, as he did not continue his acquain- tance with him after he left Palmer.
But if it be true that Claimant's hus- band lived in Palmer in the time of the war, and that there was but one man of that name living there, it must be true that said only John Douglas residing in Palmer was the

Claimant's husband.
4 th She proves by the certificate of the Sec'y. of State of Mass. that a man by the name of John Douglas served from Palmer - 8 months in 1775 - 3 years from Jan'y. 1, 1777, 3 months in 1780 - and enlisted for 3 years in April 1781.
5 th She also proves that by Joseph Stenton that her husband was a man of about 6 feet in height, which corresponds with the description of the John Douglas who enlisted from Palmer in 1781.
In the letter from your office, dated Oct. 18, 1854, addressed to James Gregory, it is objected that the statement of her husband's services agrees  too  well with the evidence obtained from the rolls in the office of the Sec'y. of State of Mass. I had supposed that the object of withholding from claimants the evidence contained in the rolls, until a statement of the service claimed was made under oath, was to attach  a  spurious  claim , in case the evidence obtained from the rolls should not  agree with the

1 preliminary statement of the claimant; and that a correspondence between the service set out in said preliminary statement, and the evidence obtained from the rolls, was considered a strong circumstance in favor of the genuineness of the claim.
In this case it must be admitted the widow has described her husband's services with an unusual degree of accuracy; but I insist there is no such identity of language in her preliminary statement, with the evidence obtained from the rolls, as to lead to any well founded suspicion that a knowledge of the second evidence had been previously obtained from the rolls.
The certificate of the Secretary of State contains evidence of three months service in 1780, of which no mention is made

in her preliminary statement,
Again: In her description of the three years service commencing 1 st Jan'y, 1777, she says it was in the 13 13 th Regiment . Yet the Certificate of the Secretary of State, does not show that this service was in the 13 th Regiment . If she was speaking from the record, and not from memory, where did she get this important fact, not stated in the record?
Other points of difference between her statement, and the Secretary's Certificate, will be discovered on examination.
I have the honor to be, Very respectfully Your obed servt
J. H. Bowles,
Hon L. P. Waldo Commr of Pensions.
Notariable Pitcher formerly wd of John L. Douglass
Proof
m
J. H. Bowles

John Douglas, Aft 14 mchs 77 to 80 Capt. Allen 113" W. of Rept. Col. Wiggins
John Dugliff, pr. pr. 9" mchs 77, 3 pr. Capt. Blagden, 13" Rept. Col. Wiggins
Mr. Douglas, Aft. Aft. Stetson, 26" Dors 76, 3 pr. 16" Rept. Col Dawson
Mr. Douglas, Capt. Colonel, Aft. pr. Hot Shepherds, 4" Rept 17" May 88 for L. mod.

Washington City Nov 19th 1858.
Geo! Whitney Esq. Sir:
I enclose for you only 2 important additional evidence cases of inhabitable Ritchie of Oct 1858 Surd. I think this will be found amply sufficient to authorize the allowance of the claim.
Yours truly
A H Markland

Meehitable Pitcher, for & widow of John Douglass - bounty - act 1838, etc.
Brief
Dodge

Brief in the case of Mehitable Pitcher, formerly widow of John Douglass. Hartford County and State of Connecticut act July 7, 1838, and subsequent acts
Claim, ("original," or "for increase.")
Proof exhibited, (if original.)
Is it documentary, traditional, or supported by rolls? If either, state the substance.
Service - Proved by Mass Cont d . rolls - identified by parole and town records - 3 rd Reg t Col d of Infantry -
Marriage, Dec r 15, 1787. Town record
Death of John Douglass, Sept 20, 1800. proved by parole
Married to Jonathan Pitcher 30 th of May 1802, who died Feb 11, 1847
Widowhood as proved by town records of Norwich, Mass. (If for increase.) proved by parole
Has additional evidence been filed since the admission of the claim? If so, what?
Admission advised by Commissioner
Name and residence of Agent
J. J. Coombs, Present.
S. G. Dodge Examining Clerk.

Marblehead, October 13th, 1854.
Honored Sir:
Your favor of the 13th. of June last relative to the case of Mehitable Pitcher, formerly the widow of John Douglass - law of July 7th, 38th c. was duly received; and as its contents made a personal visit to Palmer and vicinity - about 100 miles distant - necessary, which, not having been able to undertake until recently, has caused the delay that has ensued.
I was desirous of making this visit to Palmer in person, in order to satisfy my own mind from a personal and full investigation of the genuineness or fictitious character of Mrs. Pitcher's claim - as the case might be; for although a mere statement of the convictions of my own mind in the premises would not, and should not have the weight of legal evidence with the Department, - yet it is none the less true that I should repudiate the claim altogether, if an investigation at the bar of my own conscience a reasonable doubt of its genuineness could be entertained. I might point to names, day and date in cases where I have given the Government opportunity to correct errors against itself in the allowance of claims, the agency of which have been entrusted to my humble self, as well as my unconditional refusal to assume the agency of alleged claims, the fictitious character of which were clearly apparent to my own mind, though afterwards presented by others.

— and allowed by the government!
I will say, then, that if by the requirements of your Honor's favor I am to understand that this claim can never be allowed until witnesses can be produced who actually served in the Army with Douglass, then it is quite certain that Mrs. Pitcher must descend to the grave without relief; for on investigation I could find but two Revolutionary Pensioners living in that quarter and neither of them served where Douglass did. But as such a requirement would at this late day, in almost all cases, be equivalent to a repeal of the benevolent laws providing relief for these aged widows, it must therefore be presumed that all the Department requires is reasonable proof of identity and service .
Taking this as the standard of evidence required, I very respectfully beg leave to submit to your Honor the following points of proof in support of Mrs. Pitcher's claim — as shown by the evidence furnished by herself and friends , — and would state in the first place that I now have the Honor to forward herewith the affidavit of Micah Gates, of Palmer — the town in which Mr. Douglass resided and from which he hailed during all his Revolutionary Service — a hale old R. Pensioner, in the ninety-second year of his age, which shows that John Douglass was a resident of Palmer, and that it was notorious that while a resident of that town he, Douglass, performed much service in the War, and that he never knew any other man of the name of John Douglass who resided in that town .
As the affiant never knew anything of Douglass marital connections, as he, I, removed to and married in Norwich — some 40 miles

- from Palmer - soon after the War ended, - it is thus that Mr Gates' affidavit forms the widow's claim only so far as it goes to show that the John Douglass who resided in Palmer performed much service in the War and was the only person of that name who ever resided there within his recollection.
In addition to this proof two affidavits of Silas Hubbell and also two of Joseph Staunton - one between 70 & 80 and the other between 80 & 90 years old - and both certified to be credible witnesses - were forwarded with the widow's Declaration, - and an examination of the testimony of Mr. Hubbell, the eldest, will show that he was familiar and well acquainted with John Douglass; that while a resident of said Palmer he was reputed to have performed much service in the War of the Revolution, and that he had often heard him tell of his services in the War; that he knew of Douglass being lame from a wound which Douglass himself told him he received while in the service; that he knew it was not until sometime after the War was over that Douglass assumed the word "Spencer" for his middle name. Also that he knows that said Douglass was "the identical person who married Mehitable Wheeler, and who since his decease married Jonathan Pitcher."
Also affirming the date of Mr. Pitcher's decease and the fact of Mrs. P's continued widowhood.
The testimony of Mr. Staunton will be found to affirm most of the same alleged facts as that of Mr. Hubbell, with some important additions. Besides this testimony an inspection of the extract from the record of marriages, certified and sworn to by the Town Clerk of Norwich, will show

(2 d Sheet.)
- that Mr Douglass had no middle name at the time of his marriage , thus corroborating the allegation of the widow in her Declaration , as well as the testimony of Mr Habbell, that it was only after the Revolutionary War that Mr Douglass assumed the name of John Spencer Douglass .
And it will also be noticed that the widow explains in her Declaration the reason why she did not make an earlier application, after the decease of her last husband in 1847, and that she begs to refer to the records of the War Department for any further proof.
Upon a full view of all this evidence, both positive and circumstantial, I desire very respectfully and with all deference to submit to the Department that the proof offered by the widow affirms —
First. That she was formerly the widow of John Douglass, who was a resident of said Palmer throughout the War and the identical person who afterwards married Mehitable Wellen — as sworn to by Mr Habbell.
Second. That said Douglass performed much service in said War and (per affidavit of Micah Gates, now forwarded,) was in the three years service of the War, and that no other person of the name of John Douglass resided in Palmer during the War to his recollection .
Third. That the Service Certificate of the Hon. Secretary of State —

- Massachusetts (issued after the widow made her Declaration) shows that John Douglass hailed from said Palmer during all the six years and eleven months service indicated in the Certificate.
Fourth. That (per affidavit of Silas Habbell and the Certificate of marriage) it was some time after the War and after Mrs. Pitcher's marriage to him , that Mr Douglass assumed Spencer as a middle name , and —
Fifth. That Mr Douglass lost his life by casualty in the year 1800, and that after his decease she was married to Jonathan Pitcher, who died on the 11th of February, 1847, and that she has not intermarried since his decease.
Having this — as briefly as I well could — reviewed the evidence before presented and that now forwarded in support of Mrs. Pitcher's Claim, and believing it to be a genuine and righteous one, I respectfully submit that it affirms as reasonable proof, both of identity and service , as can be offered in almost any case at this late day, when the great bulk of all those who served in the War have passed beyond the reach of access for testimony in support of the claims of the few of their widows who still linger among us.
I am, with very great respect, Hon. Loren P. Waldo,      Your Honor's humble servt. Comm te of Pensions,      James Gregory, Washington, D.C.

6.4524 Increase Brief in the Case of Abigail Pitcher, formerly Widow of John Douglass, Cap. Rev War. Suffield Hartford County and State of Connecticut  Hartford Act Feb. 2. 1848
CLAIM FOR NEW PENSION CERTIFICATE, Inc Joint Resolution Feb 8. 1863
PROOF EXHIBITED,
A pensioned roll of Hartford Con. at $88. pr annum - Certificate return -
Claims Inc of Pension - Married Dec 15. 1787.
Personal identity & continuous widowhood shown
Admitted Feb 10. 1869 to a pension at $88. pr annum to commence Sep 20 1865 deducting all payf. since -
W. S. Frank Examining Clerk.
Name and residence of Agent. J. W. Johnson Windsor Locks Connecticut.

Pension Office Aug. 21. 1854
Sir
No such papers as you mention, seem to have been filed in 1852, or at any other time, for a pension for Mehitable Pitcher of N.Y. for services of her husband Jonathan Pitcher, in the war of the Revolution, A Mehitable Pitcher of Ct. has applied for a pension.
I am respectfully Your Obt. Servt. J. C. Calh. Acting Commissioner
A. Baird Esq. Phoenicia N.Y.

Dr Sir
Phoenix Oct 14 1854
Enclosed is a power of attorney of Polly Wood the heir at law of Capt. Pitcher of the Revolution. She tells me that Mr Stephen B. Powell her agent (who is now dead) sent her papers relative to her claim to the Department on 20 th Aug of June 1852 & that since Powell death she has heard nothing of them. The papers consisted of  1 Certificate of service  2 Affidavit of Mr Merrill a soldier under Capt. Pitcher  3 " " " " " " " " " "  4 proof of death of Capt. Wife  5 " " " " " " " " " "  6 Certificate of Comptroller of N.Y. State of his service in said State 
you will have the goodness to examine said papers and if any thing is wanted to forward her claim you will please inform me by so doing you will
Much Resp. yours etc. Sept
A. Baird.
Phoenix Oneida Co N.Y.
Hon. J. P. Waldo.

Payment to be made at Hartford by
Seth Belden, Esq.
Agent for paying Pensioners, in the Agency of
Connecticut
Payable on the 4th September and 4th March
Recorded in the Pension Office on the Roll of Pensioners under act February 2d, 1848, Page 185 Vol. II
G. T. Getty Clerk.

Go A.H.R. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. WIDOW'S PENSION.
I certify, that in conformity with the act of February 2d, 1848, Melitabile Pitcher, formerly widow of John Douglass, _____ who was a _____ corporal _____ in the revolutionary war, is inscribed on the pension list at the rate of _____ Eighty eight _____ dollars and _____ cents per annum, commencing on the 4th of March, 1848, and continuing for life, unless she should again marry; in which case the Pension is not payable after the time of such marriage. Pension Office calculation, #968.00
Given at the Department of the Interior this _____ first _____ day of _____ April _____ one thousand eight hundred and fifty nine _____
L. Thompson
Secretary of the Interior.
Examined and Countersigned,
W. A. Washington Commissioner of Pensions.
Amount due on this certificate from 4th March 1848 to 1st April 1859

A. Baird att Phoenix Oswego Co N.Y.

State of New York, Monroe Co.
I do hereby constitute and appoint inverocably Andrew Baird my true and lawful Attorney to me and in my name place and stead to ask demand and receive from the United States or from any officer or person appointed or directed to pay the same the amount due me or any sum that may be found to be justly due me as the only heir at law of Penahaw Pitchee deceased a Revolutioner officer  officer from the State of Connecticut giving and granting unto my said Attorney full power and authority to do and perform all and every act and thing in and concerning the premises as fully to all intents and purposes as I might or could do if personally present with full power of substitution and revocation hereby ratifying and confirming all that my said attorney or his substitute shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof. Witness my Hand & Seal this ninth day of August One Thousand Eight Hundred and fifty four.
Penahaw
State of New York Monroe Co.
See the next page
State of New York, MONROE CO. CLERK'S OFFICE, ROCHESTER.
I certify, that Washington Gibbons Esquire, was, at the date of the certificate of proof or acknowledgment of the annexed instrument in writing, a
commissioner of deeds in and for said county, duly authorized to take the same; that I am well acquainted with his hand writing, and verily believe that the signature to said certificate is genuine. And that the annexed instrument is executed and acknowledged according to the laws of this State.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and affixed the seal of said County, this tenth day of August A. D. 1854
H. Barron Williams Clerk.
132 30 4

State of New York County of Monroe
I do hereby constitute and appoint irrevocably Andrew Brind my true and lawful Attorney for me and in my name place and stead to ask demand and receive from the United States or from any officer or person appointed or directed to pay the same the amount due me or any sum that may be found to be justly due me as the only heir at law of Pennsylvania Witcher deceased a Revolutionary officer from the State of Connecticut giving and granting unto my said Attorney full power and authority to do perform all and every act and thing whatsoever requisite to be done in and about the premises as fully to all intents and purposes as I might or could do if personally present with full power of substitution and revocation hereby ratifying and confirming all that my said Attorney or his substitute shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof. Witness my Hand & Seal this ninth day of August A.D. 1854 Eight Hundred and fifty four.
Polly Wood
State of New York
Monroe County
City of Rochester
{ ss; On this ninth day of August A.D. 1854, before me the subscriber, personally appeared Polly Wood, to me known to be the individual described in, and who executed the foregoing Instrument, and acknowledged the execution thereof.
Washington Gibbons Commissioner of Deeds

Mr Markland Says Mr Coombs does not claim the Agency in the case having turned it over to Mr Markland. If so one must recognize Mr M. on the fact that he caused the filed the ad. evidence with him Q.C.W. 2300157

Washington City 18th Oct 1858.
Hon Geo l Whiting Comm d of Pensions.
I filed some time since a d- ditional evidence in the case of Mrs Mehitable Pitcher Comm d , 1838 Sup d , I presume the evidence has not been considered owing to my temporary absence from the city. Will you do me the favor to have the same examined at your earliest convenience.
And Oblige Your Obedt Servt
A. H. Markland

Marblehead, June 9th, 1834.
Honored Sir:
I have the Honor to forward herewith the Declaration of Mehitable Pitcher, at present a resident of Suffield in the State of Connecticut, and formerly the widow of John Douglas, alias Douglass, alias John Spencer Douglas, claiming the benefit of the law of July 7th, 1838, and the acts additional thereto, for the services of her said former husband in the Massachusetts Continental Line of the army of the Revolution throughout nearly the whole War.
At the request of the widow and her son she was visited at her place of residence to superintend her case and her appearance before the Probate Court, and also to obtain such evidence as might be pointed out. She was married in the town of Norwich in the County of Hampshire in this State, but on an informal search of the records of that town the date of the marriage to Douglas was not found, and therefore proof was taken of the date of the births of the children she

— had by Douglas and of the fact that the parents lived together as man and wife anterior to 1794 — to show that the date thereof was within the limits of the Act under which she claims; and this evidence accompanies the Declaration, by reason of the fact that other proof happens to be written on the same sheet. But on a more thorough search of the Norwich records the date and particulars of the widow's marriage to Douglas was found, — as will be seen by the sworn Certificate of the Town Clerk which also accompanies the Declaration.
It was found that no persons with whom Douglas served were known to be living, and therefore the traditional and parole affidavits of Silas Hubbell and Joseph Stanton — two aged and respectable citizens of the same County in which Douglas married and lived after the War — were taken, attesting their acquaintance with him and Douglas' own description of his Revolutionary Services while a resident of Palmer; the circumstances of his death and the wound which he received while in the service and the identity of Mrs. Pitcher as formerly his widow . And it is not doubted that the records of the War Department will affirm the Revolutionary Services of the Applicant's former husband as set forth by her.

— It will be seen that Mrs. Pitchen assigns reasons for not before making application for a pension, which, it is presumed, will be satisfactory; and in addition to those already given by her she might have named the fact of her residence, a part of the time, in another and distant State.
I am, with great respect, your Honor's humble servt. James Gregory.
Hon. Loren P. Waldo, Commissioner of Pensions, Washington, D. C.

Letter of James Gregory Esq. to J. J. Coombs in relation to the claim of Mehitable Pitcher, formerly widow of John Douglass.
Respectfully sub- mitted to the Court of Pensions.
J. J. Coombs
4

Marblehead, June 16 th , 1858.
J. J. Coombs Esq. Washington, D.C. —
Dear Sir:
Your favor of the 13 th . inst. in answer to my letter of the 12 th . reached me this morning.
The case for which I solicited your services is that of Mehitable Pitcher, now of Suffield, Connecticut, who was formerly the widow of John Douglas, alias John Spencer Douglas, — he having adopted this middle name after the War was over and after his marriage, as the copy of the record of marriage and the strong and positive proof in the case will abundantly show.
The claim was entrusted to my charge and a full memorandum of it and the services of Douglas sent to us, in behalf of Mrs. Pitcher and her friends, by Mr. Pomeroy, a respectable Magistrate of the County of Hampden in the Western part of this State, bordering on Connecticut, more than a year ago, — Mr. P. being an agent and friend of ours and having often before sent us the charge of other Pension and Bounty Land Claims from

- that question, and I am fully authorized as the Agent and Attorney of Mrs. Ritchie to empower you to act as her Attorney - as I hereby now do in the premises.
Mr. Douglass was the natural son of a Capt Douglass of the British Army, - the result of the encampment of a Detachment of the British Army at Palmer, in this State, while on a march through the country to Albany, in about 1759 - his Mother having accompanied the Detachment to Albany, from said Palmer, her original place of residence, and there given birth to him and dying when he was but nine days old. His Mother was connected with the Smith Family, who emigrated from Europe more than a century ago and became the Land Owners of a large portion of the township of Palmer (one of the largest in this State) and one of these old settlers adopted the illegitimate son of their unfortunate relative and "brought him up", - his father having soon after his birth returned to Europe, - all as tradition affirms.
Douglass was about 16 years old when the War broke out, at which time he entered the service from Palmer and served in the three years service from Palmer, at different times, throughout the whole War - always  hailing  from  Palmer , as  the  State -

Certificate  which  of the recorded service of Douglas which accompanies the Declaration &c. will show.
The Declaration with proofs  were forwarded to the Department one year & seven days ago - June 9th. 1854, with a letter explaining and commenting upon the leading points of the claim and the contents of the papers. On the 13th. of the same month the Department answered demanding more proof of the identity of John Spencer Douglas, with the John Douglas named in the Secretary's Certificate as having served from Palmer &c. adding that "this must be done by witnesses who knew that he served as alleged".
With the view of satisfying myself of the genuineness of the claim and in the hope of finding some old veteran in Palmer or vicinity who might have served with Douglas, - but with no hope whatever of finding stronger proof than that already then forwarded in support of the identity of Douglas with the person named in the Certificate - I visited Palmer on the 5th. of September last, and after an exhausting search in the melting heat of the weather, by which I contracted a severe fit of sickness, I could find only one veteran who had any knowledge of him, - Micah Gates, in the ninety second year of his age, who removed into Palmer in 1781, and recollected but one John Douglas living there at that time, who about the same time entered the three years service, and well knew that -

(285.)
— he was related to or connected with the aforesaid "Smith family", and never knew or heard of any other person, of the name of Douglas who resided in Palmer during the War but him. The chief and perhaps the only evidence to be deduced from this affidavit was the fact of no other person of the name of John D., having ever lived in Palmer other than the one he knew was connected with the "Smith Family."
The friends of the widow having sent me word of this connection before, it was my intention to obtain a supplemental Declaration of the widow, averring that fact, if, on a review of all the other evidence, the Department should not be satisfied, — the fact of his connection with the Smith Family not having been stated in the other proofs already forwarded.
With this affidavit of Mr. Gates I forwarded, on 13th. of October last, a letter of that date reviewing and pointing out all the evidence in proof of the claim, in as respectful a manner as I could; but the Department, or rather the Clerks answered in a surly and half insulting tone and manner, still denying the claim and scouting the affidavit of Father Gates, as if it was the only evidence of identity in the case! — taking no manner of notice of the strong affidavits of the venerable witnesses, Silas Hubbell and Joseph Stanton, who swear positively to the

identity of Mrs. Pitchen as former the widow of John Douglas who served in the Revolution from Palmer. The letter even goes so far as to charge that accfs must have been had to the rolls etc. in our Secretary's Office, because the senior found there corresponds in some particulars with that set forth in the widows application! This is quite complimentary to the good faith and vigilance of the Secretary! I well recollect that several years ago that Office removed a Clerk from Office for mere suspicion of such an indiscretion; and I know that the widows application was filled out by myself in this case from data or memoranda sent to me by the friends of the widow at the time we were requested to take charge of the claim.
But even if it were the fact, it would be no more than what is freely tolerated by the Department with the New Hampshire Records, and, I believe, with the records of all the States; and it is certainly high time to abolish this intolerable system of espionage over the Massachusetts Records, if with all the restrictions now enforced against free access to them the Department has no faith in confidence in the good faith of our State Offices in the premises, and continues to exact just as strong proof of the identity of the parties & claimants - husband & wife.

as if the rolls and records were thrown open to the public like those of other states. The ostensible object of the restrictions is of course all very plausible, although it cannot be denied that its legitimate operation is to prevent the allowance of many genuine claims, sooner than incur the possible risk of admitting one fraudulent one, thus reversing the old maxim of the criminal law which sanctions the discharge of 99 guilty felons sooner than one innocent man should suffer.
The accordance of the services found in the allegations of the applicant the records with, was formerly considered prima facie evidence of the genuineness of the claim by the Department, — while none of in the main points they agree, the State Office and agents of known and established integrity of twenty years standing are denounced in its ostensible official communications as conspirators combined to defraud the government, — for such, in effect, is the charge in this case. I well knew that due allowance should be made for the haste in which business must be transacted at the Department upon the overwhelming claims which are pressed upon it for adjudication, but this does not justify the treatment of gentlemen having honest business with it as if they must belong to the firm of Woodworth, Ford & Co. Yet I am fully satisfied that the Hon. Commissioner never read the Missile upon which I have commented, for if he had I am quite sure he would not have sent it as a fitting reply to my own letter and the affidavit accompanying it.
I am justified in this belief from some experience. An insulting —

(13 d S.)
letter was written me in July, 1840, charging me as a Magistrate with making an old veteran swear - "is made to swear" were the words - to a falsehood. I was, however, afterwards, enabled to show by record proof that the old gentleman swore to nothing but the truth; and, in answer to my letter of the 21 st of August of that year, complaining of such official language, the then Hon. Commissioner frankly acknowledged that he could not read all the letters that emanated from the Department with his signature, and that if he had read the one complained of he should not have allowed it to be sent on.
This correspondence appertains to the claim of Delos Colley as one of the Executors of Amos Grant (died in '37) for the benefit of the law of 1832, - the proof being strong enough to convince any jury that he served more than six months. But the claim has never to this day been allowed, and I hereby invite and authorize you to look at the papers, being fully confirmed for that purpose and to take charge of the claim. But I am scribbling too much for your patience.
Returning to the case of Mr. Fletcher, permit me to invite you to carefully read my letter, first introducing the claim, of June 9 th 1854, but in particular that of 13 th of October last, which takes up and opens all the points of proof in the case . A short Power of Attorney is herewith enclosed.
Please see over. -
very respectfully, James Gregory.

mean. I find I have omitted to notice one point in the middle of the 18th. of October, in which complaint is made that the Certificate of the town Clerk of Palmer was not furnished among the proofs to show that there was but one person of the name of John Douglas residing in that town capable of bearing arms in the course of the War &c.
Now the whole reason for not doing this lies in a "nut shell". The Clerks' Records were carefully searched and they bear no name whatever of Douglas thereon.
This is accounted for 1 st chiefly from the fact that he took his name from his natural father, who never resided in Palmer .
2 d He was a minor throughout the largest portion of his service, — the Certificate of his service showing that he was but 21 in April, 1781.
3 d He took up a new residence in Norwich, in the same County very shortly after the War — married Mrs. A. — then named Mehitable Wellen, in said Norwich, in 1787 — went to Ohio in 1800 to clear up land to remove his family there, and was killed by the fall of a tree upon him about 20th. of September of that year, & 4th. for the first few years after the Revolution the records of Palmer are deficient — tax lists & all, and are considered by the Clerk lost beyond recovery.
J.G.

Mehitable Pitcher formerly widow of John Doug- las. Conn
J. Hamlin Att'y

Washington, March 23 d 1889.
Sir:
I beg leave to solicit your personal examination of the claim of Mehitable Pitcher, formerly widow of John Douglas, alias John D. Douglas, for pension under the act of July 7, 1838, and subsequent acts.
This claim, in my opinion, is made out by the most irrefutable evidence. It was, however, disallowed by your predecessor, (Judge Waldo) on the 5 th of July, 1855, and that decision was affirmed by the Secretary of the Interior, on the 10 th of June, 1856.
Some time last Fall I filed additional evidence, viz. the affidavit of Timothy Ferrill, of Palmer, Massachusetts, of Ebenezer Brown, Town Clerk of said Town of Palmer, and of Walter R. Gregory, of Marblehead, Mass. Shortly afterwards A. H. Mackland Esq., (on my behalf) filed an affidavit of the Claimant, (no action having been had on the additional evidence filed by me as aforesaid.)
On the 26 th of November last I received a letter from your office, briefly stating that the additional affidavit of the Claimant was insufficient to warrant you "in disturbing the solemn decision of the case on appeal, in June, 1856." In this letter no notice whatsoever was taken of the additional evidence I had previously filed as aforesaid , and I presume the Examiner who wrote the letter did not look at said prior evidence - the same having been put into the file, without any action upon it, some weeks previously.
I never claimed that the affidavit of the Claimant alone was sufficient to warrant a re-opening of the case. I respectfully ask, however, a reexamination of the case in connection with all the additional evidence that has been filed, since the adverse decision, on appeal.
The testimony of said Ferrill and Brown, above alluded to, is certainly material evidence in support of the claim. Whether

said evidence is sufficient to remove the objections upon which the claim was previously rejected, depends upon the force of those objections themselves, as well as upon the character of said additional evidence.
I insist that the objections upon which the claim had been previously rejected, were, to say the least, but slight ones. So well satisfied am I, that such was the character of said objections, and that such will be the conclusion of your mind, on a careful examination of all the evidence, that I respectfully solicit your reversal of it, in connection with the following brief:
Preparatory to the presentation presentation of her claim, Mrs. Pitcher made application, under oath, to the Secretary of State of Massachusetts, for the evidence of her husband's service, contained in the military records of that office.
In this application she stated that her former husband John Douglas (afterwards John Spencer Douglas ) was a resident of Palmer, Mass. during the Revolutionary war. That he enlisted from said town in 1775, as a private in the company commanded by Captain John Davenport, in the Regt. of Col. Brewer, and served at the siege of Boston, the term of his enlistment, (8 months). That he afterwards enlisted into the Army again, about the commencement of 1777, for the term of three years, as a private, and served part of the time in that capacity, and part of the time as a non-commissioned officer, in the company of Captain Allen, of the 13 th Regiment of the Continental Army, Mass. line, commanded by Col. Smith, served out his term of enlistment, and was honorably discharged. That after the expiration of said term, he again entered the service, in the Massachusetts Continental line, for either three years or

During the war, and served as a Sergeant or Corporal, she thinks, but is unable to give the particulars of this term of service, the names of his officers, &c. but is confident that he continued in the service till the close of the war, and was honorably discharged, and returned to his home in said Palmer, - having served full seven years altogether, during all which time his domicile and place of residence was in said Town of Palmer.
(This statement of her husband's service, it will be observed, was made before she could have any knowledge of what evidence existed in the records of the Secretary's Office)
In reply to this application she received a certificate from the Secretary of State of Mass. showing:
1 st That "the name of John Douglas is borne upon a return of Captain Jonathan Dufort's Company, Col. David Brewer's Regt. of 8 months men, name on cast roll to stated Rosebury Nov. 14, 1775, from Palmer ."
2 d "Also on Continental Army Books, in Capt. Noah Allen's Comp'y. Col. Calvin Smith's Regt. from Jan'y. 1. 1777 to Dec 31, 1779, 36 mos. as Corporal, from Palmer ."
3 d "Also on return of the men mustered for 3 months for the First Regt. in the County of Hampshire of which John Pilep is Col. mustered July 13, 1780, from Palmer "
4 th Also on description list of 3 years men, age 21, complexion light, stature 6 feet, occ. cap. Farmer, from Palmer , Hampshire County. Engaged April 11, 1781, for Three years ."
5 th "Also, On the following receipt, viz: " Palmer , April 17, 1781." We The subscribers do jointly and severally acknowledge that we have each of us received of the select men of Palmer , Ninety Pound, in hand, money, as here for our engaging in the continental service for the term of Three years ,

for said Town agreeable to orders from the General Court of this State, bearing date December the second One Thousand seven hundred and Eighty, as witness our hands." "And signed by John Douglas and six others"
She then made her declaration , setting out the service of her husband in accordance with the evidence thus obtained. In addition to the statement of his service, she stated in her declaration that her husband was a resident of Palmer, Massachusetts , during all his revolutionary service; that her husband's name, at the time of her marriage, was John Douglas , was originally " John Douglas ," but after the close of the war, and before her marriage to him, he assumed the name of " John Spencer Douglas !" That she was married to him at Norwich, Mass. by the Rev. Stephen Tracy , on the 15 th of December, 1787 - and that he was killed by the fall of a tree, in Ohio, in the year 1800. She also states her subsequent marriage to Jonathan Fletcher , in 1802, and his death in 1847.
She presented the  ended the following evidence in support of her declaration:
1 st Sworn copy from the Town records of Norwich, Massachusetts , showing the marriage of John Douglas and Mahitabe Weller , on the 15 th of December 1787.
2 o The sworn copy of the records of said Town of Norwich , showing the births of several of their children. (In this record in one instance the name is written John S. Douglas , while in four other instances it is simply written " John Douglas " or " John & Mahitabe Douglas ")
3 o The deposition of Silas Hubbell , of the County of Hampshire, Mass. (in which the Town

of Palmer is situated,) who says that he is in the 82 o year of his age (in 1854) that he was well acquainted with John Douglas the identical person who married Mehitable Weller (the Claimant) and well knows that said John Douglas was reputed to have performed much service in the war of the revolution, while a resident of Palmer . He further declares that said John Douglas did not assume the middle name of Spencer , until after his revolutionary service; that he has often heard him tell of his services in the Army of the Revolution, and of his receiving a wound while in the service: knows that Mehitable Pitcher (The Claimant) was formerly the widow of said John Douglas, &c. In a second deposition the same witness states, that he was well acquainted with the said John Douglas and Mehitable Weller at the time of their marriage, in 1787; and that during all his acquaintance with said Douglas, he was lame from the effect of a wound received in battle, in the war of the Revolution, (as he himself informed him)
4 th The deposition of Joseph Hainton, of said town of Norwick, Hampshire County, Mass. who declares that he is in the 70 th year of his age (in 1854) - that he is well acquainted with the Claimant, as formerly the widow of John Douglas, alias John Spencer Douglas: Testifies that said Douglas and the Claimant lived together as husband and wife between the years 1787 & 1794, and so continued to live till the death of said Douglas about the year 1800, by the fall of a tree in Ohio. That he knows that the record of the births of the children of John & Mehitable Douglas, certified by the Town Clerk of Norwick, is a record of the births of claimant's children, by her said husband John

Douglas, or John Spencer Douglas,
In a second deposition the same witness further says, that said Douglas (claimant's husband) settled in Norwich soon after the close of the war, and continued to live there till about the year 1800, when he left for Ohio, &c. That he well knew from conversation with himself and his friends, during his residence in Norwich, that he resided in the Town of Palmer Hampshire County, Mass. during the war of the Revolution: That he well remembers that said Douglas was about six feet in height, and appeared to be about forty years of age, when he left Norwich about the year 1800.
5 th The deposition of Micah Gates, of Palmer, Mass. in the ninety-second year of his age (in 1854) - who testifies that he removed to Palmer in March, 1781, and has resided there ever since, except about six years; Was a Revolutionary pensioner, &c. He well knew John Douglas at the time he came to reside in said Palmer, and the fact was notorious that said Douglas performed several years service in the war of the Revolution; and recollects that he entered the Army near about the time that he (Gates) removed to Palmer, for the last three years' service. Well recollects that Douglas was related to or connected with the Smith family, in the north part of Palmer, in which part he (Gates) has always resided. Said Douglas went away from Palmer, shortly after the war, but he has no personal knowledge of where he afterwards lived. Is confident that no other person of the name of John Douglas, ever lived in Palmer, but the person he refers to, while he has

resided in said Town, and has no knowledge of any other person of that name having resided there during the war, excepting the person described. There is no doubt that said Douglas whom he knew in Palmer, was the identical person who was formerly the second husband of the Claimant.
Thus the evidence stood when the adverse decision was made by Judge Waldo, and affirmed by Mr. Secretary McChelland. Although I think that decision was an erroneous one, yet I do not ask you to review that decision and reverse it, on the evidence which was then before the Department, alone.
But what I claim is, that if the evidence in the case when that decision was made, was such as to leave but slight doubts as to the validity of the claim, yet additional evidence should be required to justify a re-examination of the case upon its merits, there would be required if the evidence then on file were so defective as to leave very grave doubts of its validity.
I therefore ask a re-examination of the entire case in order to see how much it lacked of being fully and satisfactorily made out when it was rejected, so that you may be enabled to determine whether the additional evidence which has been since filed, supplies the defect, or supposed defect,
This claim was disallowed by Judge Waldo, mainly upon the ground of a discrepancy between the name of the Claimant's first husband (Douglas) and the name of the soldier whose service during nearly the whole period of the Revolutionary war, is shown by the military records of Mass. Sachusett. That an undue importance was attached to this supposed discrepancy,

I think I can clearly demonstrate,
In the original application of the claim- ant to the secretary of State of Massachusetts, for evidence, she stated that her husband's name was originally "John Douglas," but afterwards "John Spencer Douglas." In her declaration she set the facts out with more particularity, stating that her husband's name was ori- ginally "John Douglas," but that after the close of the war, and before her marriage to him, he assumed the name of "John Spencer Douglas."
The record evidence in the case, (of the existence of which she had no knowledge when she made her declaration,) shows that she was married to "John Douglas." It will be observed by an examination of the papers, that the marriage record from the Town of Norwich, was not found till some time after the declaration was made, and other evidence of the marriage was at first re- sorted to under the supposition that the record evidence could not be obtained. But when it was obtained, it fully confirmed her statement, that her husband's name was, in early life, simply "John Douglas" and that the middle name of Spencer was subsequently assumed by him. She said in her declaration that he took the name of "John Spencer Douglas" before her mar- riage with him. This is probably true, but the marriage record itself shows, that at the time of the marriage this assumed middle name had not so become so fixed upon him, as to enter into the record. The record shows that she was married to "John Douglas." The name of the soldier whose service is proved was "John Douglas." There is, there- fore, no discrepancy whatever between  the name of the soldier who rendered the  service, and the name of the man to whom

the claimant was married . What difference can it make, as to what additions may have been made to his name subsequent to his marriage?
The fact that the marriage record in evidence, is the record of the marriage of the claimant, is clearly proved, and has never been called in question.
It appears by the record evidence, also, that even down to the time of the birth of their fifth child , her husband's assumed middle name of "Spencer" had not become so fixed upon him, as to be generally used in written documents . In the record of the births of the children , the name occurs five times , and in only one instance is it written " John S. Douglas ." In every other instance it is simply " John Douglas ."
It is perfectly evident from these facts, that the middle name of Spencer was simply assumed by the claimant's husband to gratify some whim or caprice of his own mind - and that it never became, really, and legitimately a part of his name . On the records of his own town he was known as " John Douglas ," simply, to the day of his death.
I think you will be satisfied that there is nothing at all in the objection based upon the supposed discrepancy in names.
And now let us examine the affirmative evidence , direct and circumstantial, which goes to identify the former husband of the claimant, with the soldier who rendered the service.
1 st I refer to the fact, that the statement of her husband's service, made by the claimant in her application to the secretary of state of Massachusetts, when she had no means of knowing what said records contained, agrees subs-

stantially, although not literally , with the evidence of service obtained. In her said application she stated that her husband resided in Palmer during all the time he was in service; and the record shows that all the service by John Douglas certified to, was rendered by John Douglas of Palmer . She stated that her husband served, in all, about seven years, and the record evidence shows that John Douglas of Palmer served about seven years. As far as she was enabled to remember the names of his officers, her statement corresponds with the record evidence obtained.
2 o She proved by a very old man (Silas Hubbell) who was well acquainted with her husband (Douglas) previous to, at the time of, and subsequent to, her marriage to him, that said Douglas was reputed to have performed much service in the revolutionary war, while a resident of Palmer - That he did not assume the middle name of Spencer until after the war - often heard him tell of his services, and of his receiving a wound in the service, of which he was lame during all his acquaintance with him .
3 o She proved by another old citizen of Norwich, who knew her husband from the time that he settled in Norwich, that he came to Norwich soon after the close of the war, - was reputed to have come from Palmer , and always understood from conversation with himself, and others, that he lived in Palmer during the revolutionary war. That he was about six feet in height [corresponding with the description list] - and was about forty years of age when he left

Norwich, in 1800. [On the description list, John Douglas the soldier is stated to be 21 years of age in 1781, which would make him just forty in 1800]
4 th , the proof by Micah Gates, a very old citizen of Palmer, that he knew John Douglas the soldier, in Palmer, as early as 1781, and knew of his last enlistment in that year. Said John Douglas went away from Palmer soon after the war, but witness had no personal knowledge of his subsequent residence, or of his marriage to claimants. Is confident that no other man by the name of John Douglas lived in Palmer during the war.
It is true that the witnesses Habbell and Harnstow only knew by reputation , and by conversations with himself, that the John Douglas with whom they were acquainted in Norwich had been a revolutionary soldier, and that he had come from Palmer . How much force should be allowed to evidence of this kind, depends very much upon the time that has intervened, between the events to which the common rumor, or reputation relates, and the time that the reputation prevails. For instance, fifty years after the war, the fact that an old man had the reputation in his neighborhood of having been a revolutionary soldier, would be but weak evidence of the fact. But within three or five years after the war, it would hardly be possible that a man, in the vicinity where he lived during the war, could be generally reputed and believed to have served several years in that war, if such were not the fact. It must be recollected that both Habbell and

Stanton became acquainted with claimant's husband directly after the termination of his service (he was married only four years after) — That they knew him in a neighboring town to that from which he claimed to have served — and that it was at this time that he was reputed to have served several years in the Revolutionary war. It is scarcely possible that he could have had that reputation, at that time and in that place , if he had not in fact so served.
It should be recollected, also, that this fact of reputation was not introduced to prove the fact of service , but merely as a circumstance to identify the man to whom it related, with the soldier whose service is proved by the record evidence. Does it not so identify him beyond a reasonable doubt?
If these witnesses testified falsely, or if they were made to say more than they knew by an artful attorney — or, in other words, if their testimony was manufactured , (as is doubtless sometimes the case) why was not their testimony made so conclusive as to leave no room for exception? Why did not Stubbell and Stanton testify that they knew the John Douglas of whom they speak, when he lived in Palmer — and, especially, why was not Gats made to testify that he knew of his own knowledge that the John Douglas who enlisted in Palmer in 1781, went to Norwich after the war, and married Abigail Wallen? If his testimony was manufactured to establish the claim, this point surely would not have been omitted.
Upon this review of the case, as it

stood when the former adverse decision was made, I claim that if the case was not then made out, beyond reasonable doubt, it at least lacked very little of being so made out; and hence that but little additional evidence was necessary to establish it. Has sufficient additional evidence been furnished?
The additional evidence filed since the claim was rejected, is as follows:
1 st The deposition of Timothy Ferrill, of the Town of Palmer, Mass, aged 76 years (in 1854) - who has always resided in Palmer aforesaid, and has been well acquainted with all the families who have resided for any length of time in said Town, for the last 60 years, and no person or family by the name of Douglas has resided in said Palmer during that time,
2 o The certificate of A. R. Murdoch, Assessor of said Town of Palmer, that he has examined the old lists of legal voters for said Town as far back as 1790 (to which date the records are quite full) and that the name of Douglas is not found among them. Prior to 1790 there are no records of consequence,
3 o The certificate of Ebenezer Brown, of Palmer, Town Clerk - That he has examined a list of all the original proprietors of the Town of Palmer, and also a list of heads of families and married persons among whom seats were distributed in the Meeting house of Palmer, in 1766, (and which latter list is understood to include every head of a family then living in said Palmer) both of which lists are contained upon the old records,

of said Town, and that the name of Doug- las is not borne upon either of said lists, He has no doubt, from the records in his possession, and from the opinions of old residents of said Town, That the John Douglas who married the Claimant in Norwich, was the identi- cal John Douglas who served from Palmer, and that he was the only person of that name who ever lived in said Town of Palmer,
4 th The deposition of Walter S. Gregory, the Agent who originally prepared the Claimants Case. He understood from the Claimant, and others with whom he conversed about the matter when preparing the case, that Claimants hus- band was brought up by his Grand- mother, whose name was, Spencer , and that was supposed to be the reason why he assumed the middle name of Spencer,
5 th An additional affidavit of the Claimant, that her husband was brought up by his Grand-mother Spen- cer, and she supposes he assumed the middle name of Spencer from venerate- tion for her,
Is the above recited additional evi- dence sufficient to remove the objections urged against the case when it was disallowed, as aforesaid? In order to determine this question, it is necessary to consider what those objections were.
Now it will be seen by an examination, of Judge Waldo's letters, that the only specific objection he ever made to the case, was, the founded on the supposed discrepancy

between the name of the claimant's husband, and the name of the soldier, as found on the military records. He called, more than once, for some explanation of the reason why her husband changed his name from "John Douglas" to "John Spencer Douglas," and this is all the additional evidence or explanation he ever did call for.
The additional affidavits of the claimant, and of Mr. Gregory, furnish this explanation. They state the fact, that Douglas was raised by his Grandmother, whose name was Spencer , and that he is supposed to have adopted the middle name of Spencer from respect and veneration for her.
I would here remark, that the demand of Mr. Waldo for an explanation of this point was never complied with, till I filed the additional affidavits of the claimant and Mr. Gregory, last Fall.
I regard this evidence as important, however, only because it complies with the requisition of the office — for in fact there was no discrepancy to explain, between the name of the man to whom the claimant was married, and the name of the soldier who rendered the service.
Although the only specific objection ever made by Mr. Waldo was based upon the supposed discrepancy in names, yet he does make some general remarks which might indicate that he considered the evidence of identity insufficient, independently of that objection.
For further corroborative evidence on said point of identity, I beg leave to call your attention to the affidavits of Timothy Ferrell, of Palmer, and the certificates of A. H. Murdoch, Apopka,

and Ebenezer Brown, Town Clerk, of said Town of Palmer, Mass.
These affidavits and certificates show, from the ancient records of said Town, and the "memory of the Oldest inhabitants," that no trace can be found of any family or head of a family, of the name of "Douglas," ever having resided in said Town, from 1766 down to the present time.
The force of this, as corroborative evidence , may not be very apparent at first view. But when considered in connection with the history of the case , as developed by prior evidence and correspondence, it will be found to have a most important bearing upon the point of identity.
It will be seen by very full statements of Mr. Gregory, the original attorney in the case, of the history and pedigree of Douglas (Claimant's husband) that as ascertained by his inquiries among the old inhabitants, that said Douglas was the illegitimate son of a British officer by the name of Douglas, who was stationed temporarily in Palmer, in 1759; that his mother's name was Smith, or she was related to the Smith family, in Palmer. She died when Douglas was only nine days old, and he was raised by her relatives in Palmer.
From this statement it appears that Douglas had no relatives of his own name in Palmer , his father, from whom he took his name, having been only a temporary sojourner there.
In view of this traditional history of the pedigree of Claimant's husband, (and traditional evidence is always competent to prove pedigree) the evi-

17 evidence tending to show that no family or head of a family of the name of Douglas has ever resided in Palmer since 1766, has a most important bearing,
The Claimant's husband never became the head of a family until after he left Palmer, and of course his name should not appear on the ancient lists of heads of families in said Town,
We had previously shown, that the Claimant's husband was well known in Norwich, (a neighboring town) immediately after the close of the war, as a former resident of Palmer , and as a revolutionary soldier of said Town of Palmer . Now if the family of Douglas has had been a numerous family in Palmer, this evidence that the Claimant's husband came from Palmer would have had much less force to identify the Claimant's husband with the soldiers who served from that Town, than when it is shown that no family of that name ever lived there.
The fact that no family of the name of Douglas ever lived in Palmer, is entirely consistent with the whole history of the Claimant's case - entirely consistent with the fact that her husband served in the Revolutionary war, from Palmer, as she alleges. It is not entirely consistent with the hypothesis that another man by the name of John Douglas lived in Palmer during the whole period of the Revolutionary war, and rendered the service proved by the records.
If there was another John Douglas a resident of Palmer during said war, who was his father? And how

is it to be accounted for that no family of that name, to which he belonged, resided in said Town? We show why Claimant's husband had no family connections in said Town of his own name, was there another John Douglas in the same town equally destitute of relatives or connections bearing his own name? That is not probable, and ought not to be presumed, in the absence of proof.
I close this long communication by reminding you again, that this important evidence I have just been commenting upon, has never been acted upon or considered in any examination of the case which has been had since the filing of it.
I respectfully ask, therefore, that this additional evidence may be examined and carefully considered, in connection with the prior evidence, and in reference to the objections heretofore made, as to the sufficiency of said prior evidence.
I am, very respectfully, Your obt servt.
A. J. Coombs, Atty for Clt.
Geo C. Whiting Esq Commissioner of Pensions.